When SJWs bash their own: Vogue magazine apologizes for “gender-fluidity” cover story

Back in March, SJWs slammed Vogue for their lack of diversity on the cover that celebrated “the modern American woman” by featuring models of different ethnicities, skin tones and body types. Across social media, Vogue was criticized for staying inside the fashion industry’s narrow parameters (oh the horror!).

Now SJWs are upset that Vogue dare to tackle gender fluidity in the wrong manner. Heaven forbid a fashionmagazine features models who talk about clothes swapping.

Seems likes SJWs are just as insufferable as feminists when you don’t follow their rules.

From Fox News: Vogue is sorry. The magazine released a statement on Friday apologizing for their recent cover story featuring Gigi Hadid and Zayn Malik.

In an interview with the publication, Hadid and Malik playfully talk about borrowing each other’s clothes, which led to the magazine titling their piece, “Gigi Hadid and Zayn Malik are part of a new generation embracing gender fluidity.”

“I shop in your closet all the time, don’t I?” Hadid says in the article. “Yeah, but same,” replies Malik. “What was that T-shirt I borrowed the other day?”

Vogue readers quickly took to social to voice their concerns over the piece, calling the magazine out for not featuring real people who identify as non-binary or gender-fluid. “Think Vogue is a bit confused on what gender fluidity is! Wearing your gf’s T-shirt does not make you gender fluid,” wrote one Twitter user.

“Is Vogue aware that there r actual, real life, gender fluid people out there,” another person wrote. “Vogue went from 100 to 0 real quick,” shared another reader.

Following backlash on social media, Vogue issued an apology.

“The story was intended to highlight the impact the gender-fluid, non-binary communities have had on fashion and culture,” read a statement by a Vogue spokeswoman. “We are very sorry the story did not correctly reflect that spirit we missed the mark.”

“We do look forward to continuing the conversation with greater sensitivity.”

So Vogue says, “The story was intended to highlight the impact the gender fluid non-binary communities have had on fashion and culture . . .” Reading that sentence is enough to make me pull my hair out. In my life I see no effect “non-conformists” have had on either fashion or our culture. Let me amend that, the only effect I see, personally, is that many of us culturally speaking, see that mental illness is significant in our society, and is certainly on the rise. I don’t see the every day people in my community indulging in this behavior, although I so see some store clerks that indulge themselves in adding purple streaks to their hair, some men have huge holes in their ear lobs, which just makes me shudder at the sight. If individuals want to indulge in whatever kind of non-conformity . . . then they should certainly go for it; but I’m not going to purchase a copy of Vogue just to see clothing fit for either sex, or the possibilities that have no baring on my life or what clothing I might be willing to spend money on. I cannot think that “gender fluid non-binary communities” have any significant degree of impact on fashion as a whole.

Maybe Vogue wants to use REAL Models for their mag and not someone with their head screwed on backwards. As I see it the only thing Vogue did wrong was not sticking to their own story, apologizing for something they did not do wrong. You kiss a$$ to a few and pi$$ off the rest of society when you do that. If these people did not like the story all they had to do was NOT BUY THE MAGAZINE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Glenn47 . . . I would say you are absolutely correct on that assessment. They have forgotten their prime mission which is to to display couture . . . not be PC warriors. I can only say, I wish their demise to be a speedy ignominious one! As I find I am sick of their foisting all this tripe onto us the citizenry.